General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSorry, but impeaching Barr looks weak and IS weak. It's Trump who must be impeached
Trump appointed Barr. Trump directs Barr. Trump ordered his entire Administration to obstruct Congress. That's without even touching on the content of the Mueller Report, or Trump's unindicted co-conspirator status as "Individual One" in the Justice Department's New York Southern District. The same Republican Senate will refuse to remove Barr from office that almost certainly would refuse to remove Trump from office. But the case against Trump is far more grave and ultimately more compelling that that against his newly appointed lackey Attorney General.
Moving against Barr just signals a fear to move against Trump. That is what it would look like and in fact that is what it would be. Republicans would jump all over it. For one thing they will say it was a clear admission that it proves the evidence simply does not exist to impeach Trump, and that Democrats were looking for a consolation prize scalp instead.
Republicans, and Trump himself, will become increasingly brazen in defying Congressional oversight in the House. But no court in the land will deny Democrats the ability to subpoena the testimony and documents needed to conduct an impeachment trial in the House. That offers us our strongest constitutional grounds. If we fail to use it Republicans will have a field day and make Democrats the primary targets of investigations instead.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)pushing back the darkness of the unknown, the best strengthener against my anxiety.
Here's a link to a description of where the very informed author of the regulations for the special counsel thinks the legal processes are at. Btw, once Mueller is not longer employed with the DoJ, he has to testify when house requires and Barr cannot stop it. The regulations were written to guard against the possibility of a crooked AG, though they didn't envision a situation this bad.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/opinion/barr-mueller-report.html
Btw, a big pat on the shoulder for all of us. I don't know what the report might be if we hadn't elected a Democratic majority in the house, empowering them to use and BE the system as intended.
EveHammond13
(2,855 posts)EveHammond13
(2,855 posts)Tom Rinaldo
(22,917 posts)I leave it to wiser legislative heads than I to determine if two simultaneous impeachment trials is a wise move or not.
kentuck
(111,110 posts)Would it be the same as a vote to impeach Trump?
It would be instructive, like a shot across the bow.
LiberalFighter
(51,170 posts)Moving against Barr builds the case against Trump to impeach him.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,917 posts)If we don't press the case against Trump out of the gate than we will be seen as going after Barr for "rightly protecting the rights of the President since no underlying guilt exists sufficient to impeach Trump."
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Response to Tom Rinaldo (Original post)
Cetacea This message was self-deleted by its author.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,917 posts)Azathoth
(4,611 posts)I don't know how much clearer Pelosi can be. This is the good ol score-political-points-during-hearings-but-don't-rock-the-boat strategy from the Dubya years.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)directly at Trump that risks raising his approval just before the election?
Much more sensible to go after a henchman who may just be thrown out of office, and even if not will not help Trump in any way.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,917 posts)but none of the downside. He gets to continue to claim that the Mueller Report vindicated him and that the investigation of his alleged crimes is over AND IT WAS A WITCH HUNT with even Democrats knowing that there are no grounds to impeach him. THEN Trump goes on the offense again saying now the Democratic witch hunt is focused on the upstanding member of his administration who called out the Democratic hoax deep state investigation.
C_U_L8R
(45,025 posts)Bring on the impeachment hearings and bring the evidence to light.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Tom Rinaldo
(22,917 posts)You're wrong. Period.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Tom Rinaldo
(22,917 posts)lunatica
(53,410 posts)tinrobot
(10,926 posts)We take out the supporting forces, then go after the main dude.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,917 posts)By the time the Senate refuses to remove Barr the presidential election will be looming and only a fraction of the evidence against Trump will have been aired via the Barr trial. Trump will campaign and raise money over the Democrats failed attempt to remove his Attorney General for standing up to the witch hunt. And he will either win or lose in November 2020. If he loses he will not be impeached. And if he wins he will not be impeached.